Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on these and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
We encourage you to be as honest as possible in letting us know how you feel about the game. The information and answers provided are anonymous, not shared with any third-party, and will not be used for purposes other than survey analysis.
Access the survey HERE!
Do you think that non horror / horror adjacent belongs here?
I like having something different every now and then but I feel for killers we should stay on the horror end. Things like terminator would be cool but I don’t want it to end up like fortnight or become less like it should. For survivors I’m open a bit more, scary movie and things like that would be fun but I don’t want it to be purely silly (a bit like a few skins is fine I just don’t want every match looking like a crayon drawing.)
Comments
-
yea, it isn’t horror anymore but I still feel like it should keep the vibe. You know?
1 -
I think it's fine to have a few killers who lean on the edge of horror. But I don't want it to become a Fortnite-like as you said, where there's too much focus on bringing in new licences and not enough on creating cool killers who fit DbD's aesthetic.
I wouldn't have any issue with a Terminator chapter as long as there was some proper horror surrounding it. It was pretty scary for its time (I heard) and the Terminator itself fits the bill for a Killer really well.
6 -
Horror adjacent, yes depending on the context.
Non-Horror, not really.
It depends on how it could work within the bounds of DBD. I'm a firm believer that horror is subjective and in DBD's case, if it has an element of horror it should have a chance to be represented regardless if some people don't find it scary. Me personally, I don't find Clown, Chucky, Skull Merchant or Wesker necessarily 'scary' but I know some do.9 -
It's really about the tone and mood than the genre it falls under. Even though it isn't horror, a franchise like John Wick would be more fitting for DBD than a movie like KKFOS.
4 -
This is just ONE of Nicolas Cage's MANY horror movies… So don't see how people can say he's not a horror icon at this point.
7 -
Ideally the ambiance/gameplay/actions that occur in DBD would allow anything to enter the fog and feel as though it’s being embraced by horror.
That being said, those things themselves become part of that ambiance, and if it’s overall too goofy/detached from horror, it can detract from that ambiance.
Kinda like with the upcoming neon tinged Halloween cosmetics for Sable/Mikaela. The neon tinge to the ends of the hair, the neon fingers (but not the whole hand), even the neon flame patterns on the legs are okay. But I’m not a fan of how their shoes are entirely neon. It’s no longer an “accent”, but a replacement.
0 -
No. I'm still rolling my eyes at D&D and Lara Croft.
But I think the first Terminator movie is a straightforward horror flick.
4 -
I have nothing to say about Lara cause I don’t know the IP but I can defend dnd. There is a Realm known as the shadow fell that is the horror area, vampires ghosts all the fun stuff, the original idea was to use Strahd, an immortal vampire dictator who is cursed to never leave the realm. It would’ve been proper horror but castlevania was the next chapter and they didn’t wish to use 2 vampires right next to each other so they chose vecna because the curse of Vecna story was coming out around the same time,
0 -
Sure, Strahd would have been fine, but the D&D chapter is what it is, and I think Vecna and the survivors have really bad designs. Even their other cosmetics look like they're made to be as tacky as possible, like being an adventurer requires wearing only what you can find in thrift shops.
Strahd would have been better but Dracula is the more important vampire, so while I dislike the D&D chapter, if I had to choose between Strahd and Dracula, it would be Dracula any day of the year.
0 -
I think so long as the IP has solid enough horror connections for the devs to work into the chapter, it'll be fine. Vecna's dungeon sold me on the DnD chapter, and Laura being from specifically the first survivor trilogy TR game that was very horror in nature gives me the reassurance the devs aren't just going to start adding John Wick or smt.
3 -
I will admit Azalin Rex would’ve been cooler, pretty much just Vecna but better fluff to make him horror
1 -
I would probably never play any other killer or survivor if they did a Terminator chapter. Would be a full on Terminator/Sarah or John Connor main
2 -
Horror Adjacent depends on how close. D&D for example REALLY tows the line between acceptable and not (since you can straight up make a horror campaign and there's even a horror setting with Ravenloft, but Vecna's more along the fantastical side of things, even if he's a rotting corpse held together by the souls he's stolen and placed in his phylactery), but something like Jurassic Park, which borders along a full-on Slasher series at times, or Terminator would fit depending on which film you're taking from.
Non-horror IPs straight up don't belong in a horror game. I don't care how much inspiration the Survivor timeline of Tomb Raider took from The Descent, the IP as a whole is an action-adventure with supernatural (NOT the same as horror) elements. Even if Lara works PERFECTLY as a CHARACTER, she is still incredibly out of place and just shouldn't have been added. Though I would much rather have these than real people.
1 -
Horror adjacent - Yes
Non-Horror - No
In my opinion of course.
0 -
The official perspective is that anything which has room to fit into the horror genre is fair game, a perspective I would agree with if I thought BHVR was good at doing that(Vecna doesn't belong here). That's why we got DnD and Castlevania, which aren't strictly horror series but have prominent horror elements. I think it's worth noting, though… Terminator is a horror movie? The series definitely becomes more of an action series, but the first isn't even just adjacent to horror, it's in every sense just a horror movie. Terminator is absolutely fair game.
If you're asking me, Wesker is about as non-horror as I'm willing to accept. He's a very actiony version of the character that doesn't belong and gets in because Nemesis put in a good word. Vecna is beyond the Wesker Threshold.
2 -
Well, Trickster and Skull Merchant are everything but scary. On the licensed side, Wesker, Dracula, and Vecna are not exactly horror antagonists to be honest. I think that DbD is going through their Fortnite phase, in a sense that they may continue to bring stuff that can be stretched as "horror" so I wouldn't be surprised if the Joker or Darth Vader appears as killers.
0 -
So the Entity can take say a female race car driver, as long as her name is fictional Rachel Parker and not real life Danica Patrick? What's the difference? They took a horror movie actor and wrote lore to bring him into the game. The lore behind Nicolas Cage is that he was set to play The Blight in a movie, and the Black Veil set him up, so that when he was rehearsing the scene where Talbot Grimes (The Blight) summoned the Entity, Nicolas Cage actually summoned the Entity for real.
The way I see it, since the Entity can take any person, any time, any where, again I ask what's the difference between a race car driver named Rachel Parker and one named Danica Patrick?
(Note I am not saying they need to add Danica Patrick, just she was the first non-horror real person I thought of to compare to someone who would be fictionally added to DBD)0 -
The Terminator scared the hell out of me as a kid the first time I saw it. I still remember not sleeping that night.
I was watching a VHS recorded version of it off cable TV and I turned it off after the truck explosion near the end and thought that was literally the end of the movie and turned it off.
Imagine if I had known the movie wasn't over and actually watched the actual end 💀💀💀
0 -
I mean, you are entitled to your opinion, but its' already been established before Nicolas Cage that all fiction exists as real somewhere in the world of Dead by Daylight. Feng Min has a "cosplay" outfit for Jill Valentine and another one for Cheryl Mason, showing that until she met her in the Entity's realm, Feng thought Jill was just a fictional character and so was Cheryl. Plus, even if that wasn't the case, the point of the lore is that The Black Veil manipulated things to take Nicolas Cage into The Fog. So one of them probably wrote the script, etc. So that doesn't make the game fictional, just that The Black Veil exists and were making a movie (but probably just to help the Entity kidnap people, as that's what they do.)
1 -
AoT is my favourite non horror/horror adjacent IP in this game.
The survivors look a tad goofy by being costumes rather than Legendary replacements but other than that they fit right in here.
I have yet to meet somebody who actually dislikes The Armoured Titan.
1 -
I strongly prefer straight horror for licenses. For example, while TR and DnD are horror adjacent enough, they just don't do much for me. I still think of this game as a sort of "Horror Hall of Fame" and I'd much rather they just keep expanding on that
0 -
As long as it isnt vibe-breaking and/or non horror it can be here. I'm more lenient with survivors considering they are essentially skins, and I doubt theres anything much more non-horror than the bright gamer feng skins lol. Killers should always be horror adjacent at minimum and actually look scary (no velociraptors)
0 -
as long as it’s the T-1000 and arni voices him I’ll buy him.
0 -
yea I forgot the difference. It’s been a bit
1 -
I think the game needs to intentionally stay the horror juggernaut that it is.
Like others Wesker is probably my limit.
0 -
Even if Lara works PERFECTLY as a CHARACTER, she is still incredibly out of place and just shouldn't have been added.
This is an argument that I see so many people use and it never holds up because it crumbles into itself as soon as we look at the survivor roster. Most of the original survivors in the game have nothing horror related to their lore or character yet they still manage to find their place in the game because there is more themes to this game than horror.
0 -
Except all original characters regardless of theme are objectively horror characters by default because they were made for Dead by Daylight itself, which is created with the focus to not only be a horror game, but is also classified and advertised as being one.
Lara Croft however is not a horror character because Tomb Raider is not a horror game, it has never been classified nor advertised as being one and while it has some scary elements here and there, they are not the main focus of the franchise. Tomb Raider itself is closer to that of Indiana Jones and Uncharted than it is to anything horror related.
3 -
And yet, by virtue of every original character being made for a HORROR IP (which DBD is, despite being more of a comedy at this point), they are HORROR characters. It doesn't matter what other themes their stories explore, the moment BHVR conceptualized them, they became horror characters.
I don't have an issue with Lara being here as a character. She fits in really nicely, maybe even better than some of the originals. The issue I have is with her IP. No matter how well she fits in, Lara is fundamentally NOT a horror character and just feels out of place because of it.
As an example because I've seen other people throw him out there, Wesker is kind of the opposite of Lara in a way. The version we got came from RE5, which is… really not a horror game by any means. But Resident Evil is a horror IP, and that makes Wesker and the rest of the RE cast horror characters, even as the series spent a few years drifting away from its roots. This is what makes him okay in my eyes but not Lara.
If the Survivor Timeline was the only version of Tomb Raider, I wouldn't have this opinion, because it would absolutely count as at least horror-adjacent. But it's not, and because of that Lara sticks out like a sore thumb in a cast of characters created for various horror IPs… and Nick Cage for some reason.
1 -
I think Lara Croft is the only real outlier I've seen that made me question "is this horror enough for DBD" but also, who cares, it's hilarious and silly and cool that Lara Croft is in the game. The more stuff in the game, the better IMO.
0 -
For me, it's less horror and more thriller, so a lot more killers and survivors from non-horror can enter. The Tomb Raider games have horror elements in them anyway, and so long as there's a darker element within them. I'd even consider the "Saw" franchise as a crime thriller with horror elements, rather than true horror.
It's sad to see horror gatekeeping of this game. Granted, there's the fear of this becoming like "Fortnite", but I cannot see that happening. This game is safe as it is, and so long as the horror element is there, then add whatever works within the horror element.
0 -
I was thinking about this and the most ridiculous thing I think they could add while still being arguably horror would be Homer Simpson, due to the Treehouse of Horror episodes. And truthfully, I think I'd buy a Homer Simpson/Treehouse of Horror chapter.
0 -
I think we crossed that line a long time ago. The Mr. Puddles skin for the clown and the bunny mascots for legion was the beginning of the slippery slope that we find ourselves in now. I actually like both those skins. But once you start breaking into the cartoony animal outfits for killers then there is no going back. Now we're to the point where FNAF is joining DBD. We're just an Ariana Grande skin away from being another Fortnite at this point. I've been a big fan of DBD for a long time but BHVR is getting awfully close to crossing one too many lines for me.
0 -
Nah. If they are going into the Simpsons IP then it'd either be Kang/Kodos or Sideshow Bob.
0
